I'm sure many here have seen this study:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/44570490_The_Effects_of_Growth_...

The athletes in the GH group (and the test + GH group) were given 2mg/day (6iu, right?) of HGH for six weeks after a 2-week buildup. Anaerobic capacity, measured by Wingate cycling test, improved fairly dramatically - about 4%. The effect was additive on the improvement in anaerobic capacity from testosterone (250mg/week). The authors speculated that this 4% improvement might translate into a 0.4 improvement over a 100 meter race. I think that's too optimistic, given that the Wingate is a 30 second test. Still, any improvement is good.

What I'm interested is the mechanism of action here - why was there an improvement in sprint capacity, and how should this inform athletes using HGH for anaerobic sports? The authors speculate that it's an issue of energy supply. If that's the case, then a shorter sprint - 60 or 100 meters - likely won't be significantly improved by HGH administration, as those races are primarily alactic. The 200-400 meter range is where you would expect to see more improvement if this is the case. For non-sprinters, this might mean that athletes in sports requiring very short bursts of speed (American football, soccer, etc) stand to gain much less from HGH use than long sprinters or swimmers.

However, I'm interested to see what everyone else here thinks. Is there something the researchers didn't consider here?

I'm a recreational sprinter with a 240iu supply of GH (my marks don't count against my competition, so I don't consider it cheating, FWIW). Right now, I'm plotting out a 7 week course, ramping up to 6iu/day for the last five weeks to match the study. I plan to split those up into morning and early afternoon/pre-training doses. I'll report back if anyone's interested.